Input shaping & pressure advance tuning & RRF <3.5rc8
-
I know it's been discussed on older versions of RRF on quite a few occations by now allready, but please bear with me
😅
With the changes done to input shaping since RRF 3.5 dev started have we now come to a point where it should be brought up again in plenum?
Maybe a pinned thread in either the "beta firmware" or "tunning and tweaking" category where we as a community could discuss how to tackle it allongside the devs, both in it's current stage and as development progresses🤷♂️Or is it still some changes planned in the near future that will make starting that discussion in terms of the steps to approach tunning input shaping and with that what acceleration/jerk & print speeds works best for your printer on RRF <3.5rc8 obsolete?
I don't like using myself or my skillset as a metric for anyone or anything. Never the less I would like to at least think I've got a decent level of understanding when it comes to DIY 3D printers and what makes them tick and I try to keeping myself up to date with RRF's firmware and documentation development. And despite that I got the feeling that the whole subject of Input Shaping in RRF (even when using a 1LC or other supported form accelerometer) is at best concidered a guessing game, if not bordering to voodoo. And maybe this is by proxy due to the past(?) issues with pressure advance and how that's been implemented etc. Which i really think is a shame, and should be mitigated in some shape way or form.
I TOTALLY get that making any sort of documentation, guides or otherwise literature for anything is a huge undertaking. And that even when being used on one set motion platform/machine/, and here we are with a enormous difference in configurations, build qualities, experience levels etc., that just makes everything that much harder to document and account for.
So I don't know, could we help in any way to make a better/good SOLID way to attack these somewhat advanced tuning procedures?
Sorry for the lenghty somewhat rambly post, but it's something that's been annoying me for a while
🙈 -
@Exerqtor IMO, docs should be brought up to par with klipper. things like interpreting the graphs, looking at not just shaping but mechanical issues, loose belts etc.... it would also be nice if the plugin would give suggested freq and accelerations.
I also find the orientation chart confusing as hell for the accelerometer, especially when it's using a 1LC as guide when not everyone uses one of those.
